Freedom Writer - February 1995 [ref001] 'Reader's Digest' errs onchurch-state separation B

Freedom Writer - February 1995

[ref001]

'Reader's Digest' errs onchurch-state separation

By Barbara A. Simon, Esq.

Over the past few weeks several readers have sent us copies of an 
article printed in the December 1994 _Reader's_Digest_. The article, 
condensed from _The_Theme_is_Freedom:_Religion,_Politics_and_the_American_
Tradition_ by M. Stanton Evans, is titled "The Supreme Court Is Wrong 
About Religion." What infuriated our readers was that the article 
was filled with inaccuracies, yet there was no way to respond because 
_Reader's_Digest_ does not print letters to the editor. _Reader's_
Digest_ boasts that it sells over 28 million copies in 17 languages 
monthly. When inaccuracies are published, each inaccuracy is multiplied 
by 28 million.

Evans wrote: "Over three decades ago the Supreme Court declared that 
prayer in the public schools was unconstitutional..." The Supreme 
Court has never declared prayer in the public school unconstitutional. 
What is unconstitutional is state-sponsored prayer in the public schools. 
Children are free to pray in public schools whenever they choose, 
provided that their right to pray does not interfere with the right 
of other students to learn. 

Evans stated: "Was the First Amendment really intended to build a 
'wall of separation' between church and state? History is clear: it 
was not." Evans is incorrect. The phrase "separation of church and 
state" was coined in the 17th century by the early Baptist leader 
Roger Williams. Both James Madison, who is known as the Father of 
the Constitution, and Thomas Jefferson used that phrase to describe 
the meaning of the religion clauses. In 1802, during Jefferson's presidency, 
Jefferson replied to a letter from the Danbury Baptist Association 
of Connecticut. In his letter, Jefferson declared that the American 
people, through the First Amendment, had erected a "wall of separation 
between church and state."

Evans believes that the Supreme Court, in interpreting the Constitution, 
should rely on the "Founding Father's intentions." The U.S. Constitution 
is an evolving document, which has grown with our nation. Because 
our Constitution is elastic, and not static, it has been able to withstand 
the test of time. Back in 1787 James Madison stated: "In framing a 
system which we wish to last for ages, we should not lose sight of 
the changes which the ages will produce." To understand what is meant 
by the First Amendment, it is not our Founding Father's intentions 
that are controlling, but the decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court.

The U.S. Supreme Court first adopted the phrase "separation of church 
and state" in the 1878 case _Reynolds_v._United_States_. The Court's 
majority opinion stated: "I contemplate with ... reverence that act 
of the whole American people which declared that their legislature 
should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting 
the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between 
church and state." The Court stated that Jefferson's term "wall of 
separation between church and state" "may be accepted almost as an 
authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the [First] Amendment."

By providing misinformation Evans' article does a disservice to the 
readers of _Reader's_Digest_. 

[ref002][ref003] Return to table of contents 

Copyright 1995 IFAS
The Freedom Writer / ifas@crocker.com

[ref001] ../banner.gif
[ref002] index.html
[ref003] ../../uparrow.gif

        This file is copywritten by the Institute for First
        Amendment Studies.

        Subscribe to The Freedom Writer and Walk Away news
        letters by writing to or telephoneing the Institute
        for First Amendment Studies:

        Post Office Box 589
        Great Barrington, Massachusetts.  01230
        Telephone: (413) 528-3800
        E-Mail: ifas@crocker.com
        Web page: http://www.crocker.com/~ifas